Main page

Last  page update: 26 January, 2017.

Last  site update: 16 June, 2019.


The Jewish way
As this article will show, Jesus wasn’t executed Roman style on a Roman cross; He was executed Jewish style. Stoned while hanging/crucified on a living tree.
Click Just as the Old Testament laws command for someone who leads the nation astray and is a blasphemer. Obviously all false claims by a corrupt and illegal priesthood; but still that was how He died. All according prophesy.

Jesus life and death was not only prophesied, it was following a pattern that God Himself crafted in the centuries leading up to His life, death and resurrection. Every Christian knows Jesus is called “the Lamb of God”. But He’s also also a bullock, a goat, a first fruit (sheaf of grain), a bread, a red heifer and many more things. None of those things are just random names. No, they are rooted deep into Scripture that formed the Jewish ways and society.

Note: the word ‘hanged’ occurs many times in this article; it never means hanged by the neck, but always attached to a living tree.

The place - Beth Pagi
Beth Pagi was a huge area with lots of activity. Jesus frequently visited places in this area. Including in His last days. For that reason I think it’s useful to get a rough impression of where all those places were located.
Click here for more information about ‘Beth Pagi’

The people - Many
A little background info on the people involved may give a fuller understanding why people did what they did. Many of the priests weren’t Levite. They got their position by bribing the Romans who for example appointed a new high priest every year. Greatly driven by politics, finances and control.

Click here for more information about ‘The people’

The many synonyms for the name Jesus

Many different names/aliases point to very same person, Jesus. Censorship was applied but by matching events names can be linked and the original text can be restored (fairly well).

The name Jesus is often erased, but often still readable with modern equipment. Several pseudonyms were used. .

In b.San.67a "Ben Stada" and "Ben Pandira" were used to describe the same person "hung on the eve of Passover".

Tosephta has a story about Yeshu ben Pandira's follower, Jacob of Kephar Sekhania, who taught Eliezer 'the saying of the minim' (t.Hull.2:23). The Munich Talmud attributes that saying to Yeshu ha-Notzeri. (b.AZ.17a)

--> Ben Stada = Ben Pandira = Yeshu ben Pandira = Yeshu ha-Notzeri = Jesus


Court hearings

Every question the priests asked Jesus was geared to get Him convicted for blasphemy, leading the nation astray and sorcery. Because those charges likely make no sense in the Christian mind, the ancient Jewish definitions must be understood. Click.

After His arrest Jesus was taken to ‘father of the court’ Annas who questioned Him mainly about His teachings and disciples - John 18:19. This hearing was in Bethphage were criminal court met.

After that they took Him to high priest Caiaphas’ Stone Chamber. It was in this place many witnesses were gathered. Those witnesses where the priests Caiaphas had sent to spy on Jesus during His ministry. Likely those priest were also part of court.
Caiaphas had a house somewhere in Jerusalem, but he had to stay in the ‘Stone Chamber’ in the Temple complex the 7 days preceding Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles and Atonement Day. During those 7 days he had to study, pray and otherwise prepare for the feast. Another reason was that he had to stay pure which was impossible when he had to travel trough  Jerusalem to his home.

Matt 26:63 But Jesus was silent. …

Jesus was silent because a defendant had to silent.

The basic assumption in halakhah is that a man does not belong only to himself; just as he has no right to cause physical harm to others, so he has no right to inflict injury on himself. This is why it was determined that the confession of the defendant had no legal validity and should not be taken into consideration . . . Not only can no man be forced to incriminate himself through his own testimony, but self-incrimination has no significance and is unacceptable as evidence in court.
Steinsaltz and Galais, Esential Talmud, pp. 167–168.

Everything a defendant says will be ignored. Because all the witnesses gave contradicting statements the high priest put Him under oats so He must speak

Matt 26:63 … And having responded, the high priest said to him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou are the Christ, the Son of God.

The high priest ask his question and Jesus answers:

Matt 26:64 Jesus says to him, Thou have said. Nevertheless I say to you, Henceforth ye will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming in the clouds of the sky.

Matt 26:65 Then the high priest tore his garments, saying, He has blasphemed. What further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye heard his blasphemy.

It’s getting tricky now :-)

What is a vain oath? [If] one has taken an oath to differ from what is well known to people . . . If one has taken an oath concerning something which is impossible—“. . . if I did not see a camel flying in the air . . .” [M. Shebu 3.8 Ia–b, IIf–g]

[But it must be stated] by a man out of his own mouth. And they are liable for deliberately taking such an oath to flogging . .

The claims Jesus made (sitting next to God and riding a cloud) sounded so as ridiculous as flying camel so Jesus was accused of ‘a vain oath’. (the Sadducee didn’t believe in afterlife) The punishment for such an oath is “40 stripes minus 1”.

Jesus outsmarted them once again……no death sentence yet.

John 18:19 Then the high priest put questions to Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.
John 18:20 Jesus made answer, I said things openly to the world at all times; I have given my teaching in the Synagogues and in the Temple to which all the Jews come; and I have said nothing secretly.
John 18:21 Why are you questioning me? put questions to my hearers about what I have said to them: they have knowledge of what I said.

The Bible doesn’t directly say so, but from Jesus’ answer it’s clear they claimed He taught secret arts, sorcery

Mark 14:63 And the high priest, violently parting his robes, said, What more need have we of witnesses?
Mark 14:64 His words against God have come to your ears: what is your opinion? And they all said it was right for him to be put to death.

Lev 21:10 "The high priest has the highest rank of all the priests. The anointing oil has been poured on his head, and he has been ordained to wear the priestly garments. He must never leave his hair uncombed or tear his clothing.

When a priest during a hearing heard one of the many types of blasphemy click, he stood up and tears his cloak. Not his priestly garments but a special ‘cloak of justice’ he wore over his priestly garments during a court session. With that the sentence was made very clear. Excommunication from Israel. Again  a rather special definition of  a word. Excommunication is casting someone out of the nation. Not in the sense that he or she never was allowed to cross the borders again but as casting with stones. So it’s more like casting someone out of this life.
Jesus had two charges against Him.

  1. 39 stripes for a vain oath. Making an impossible statement under oath. This was a minor type of blasphemy.
  2. Death by stoning for blasphemy. The worst type of blasphemy; teaching larges groups of people things that lead them away from God.

The punishment of 39 stripes was given right after the third hearing which was at dawn.


More  details on the trial will follow a t a later time (soon I hope).


The mild flogging at Pilate's place

Luke 24:44 And Pilate marveled if He had already died. And calling the centurion near, he asked him if He died already.

It's clear Pilate expected Jesus to be on the cross much longer. Of course Pilate knew Jesus was flogged earlier that day because he (Pilate) ordered it himself.

Luke 23:22 And a third time he said to them, For what evil did this One do? I found no cause of death in Him. Therefore, chastising Him, I will release Him.

In fact the very word chastising (paideuo) tells us the punishment given by Pilate was mild. Strong's definition: train children, instruct, cause to learn, correct.

"...if the Roman governor had, indeed, before sentencing Jesus, ordered him to be scourged, as is reported in John and hinted at in Mark and Matthew, he was probably scourged, but not tortured as severely as in the normal Roman practice respecting persons accused of "laesa maiestas," ...but...may have been given several blows or strokes, not with the view to extracting further confessions of guilt from him, but solely with a view to compelling or inducing him to express regret and repentance and to promise that he would no longer air royal pretensions"

Haim Cohn The Trial and Death of Jesus KTAV Publishing House, New York. 1977, page 206-207.

So the crucifixion combined with the flogging wasn't reason to believe  that Jesus died in six hours on the cross. In an extreme case a person lived 9 days on the cross.

"Instances are on record of persons surviving on a cross for nine days. But in our Lord's case there were circumstances altogether peculiar, which must have greatly tended to shorten the period of suffering. Ignorant of these, Pilate indicated his surprise that the death of Jesus should have occurred so soon, Mar. XV. 44. And as there were peculiar circumstances tending to produce an unusually speedy death, so there were reasons for effecting the removal of the body with the least possible delay"

  Vol. II, Blackie & Son, London.


The death sentence

John 18:31 Then Pilate said to them, You take Him and judge Him according to your own Law.....

‘your own law’ demands stoning.

John 18:31 ..... Then the Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,

This statement can be understood in three ways:

The last, third, option seems most probable and it reveals how sneaky the corrupt leaders were.

In the NT we read a little about Zealots. In historical documents there is much more about them. The actively attacked the corrupt leaders for collaborating with the Romans. Even killed them. Always trying to cause riots. Etc.

The priests were clearly afraid the people would start a riot. That could possibly cost their life but for sure the Romans would have take away any selfrulership of the leaders. No power = no money.

So John 18:31 was phrased to sound like this in Pilate’s Roman ears:

“Then the Jews said to him, It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death, because according to Roman law a revolutionary should be killed by the Roman government.”

John 18:33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said to him, Are you the King of the Jews?

Jesus being king of the Jesus on Roman territory would make it a Roman case. If Pilate killed Jesus the priests would get what they wanted and Pilate would gets the wrath of Jesus’ followers.

In the first half verse 31 we saw Pilate was done and handed over Jesus to the Jews for execution. In the second half of verse 31 we saw the Jews forced Pilate in doing the dirty work. Jesus had many followers who hated the corrupt leader, so Pilate was tricked into taking (part of) the blame.

Pilate didn’t find any proof Jesus broke any Roman law so he tried to compromise by flogging Him and giving a choice between releasing Barabas and Jesus.
The Jews made their blackmail extra clear to Pilate.

John 19:12 And from thereafter Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If you let this man go, you are not Caesar's friend: whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar.

Irenaeus relates that Herod [Antipas] and Pontius Pilate came together and condemned Jesus to be crucified. “For Herod was frightened lest he be ousted by him (= Jesus) from the kingship . . . while Pilate was constrained [forced or blackmailed] by Herod and by the Jews [rulers] around him to deliver [Jesus] unwillingly to death on the grounds that not to do so would be to go against Caesar by liberating a man who was given the title of king”
Winter, On the Trial, p. 58.

From the quote below it’s clear  Pilate didn’t believe Jesus was trying to take the rulership of Israel away from the Romans. If he did His body would never be given to Joseph for burial. That’s another bit of evidence Jesus wasn’t executed under Roman law. And with that not the Roman prescribed way.

Moreover, according to Roman law the body of someone executed on a charge of high treason could not be given to relatives or friends for burial; the idea was to prevent the burial site from becoming a shrine and focal point for any followers.
Kiehl, The Passion, p. 149.

Mark 15:43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honorable counselor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly to Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.

Yeah, I know that looks a bit contradicting. If Pilate really gave in to their blackmail about not being a friend of Caesar for not executing a  revolutionary then why did Pilate give away His body? Likely just a compromise.

It seems clear the priests main grudge was that Jesus did cost them a lot of money. The families of the leaders makes an enormous amount of money on all the activities in Beth Pagi. Jesus put all that at risk by things like throwing over the tables of the money changers. But also by His peaceful teachings that would liberate the people, from all those manmade laws of  the leaders. Without those laws they would lose grip. And that would ultimately lead to less income. They also had to balance between two groups they feared. Romans They had to stay friends with the  Romans who hav eput them in their high positions and gave them certain liberties. Jesus being proclaimed Messiah/king of Israel would undermine Roman authority. The reaction of the Romans would be to dispose of all Jewish leaders and rule Israel with their own iron fist. Jews They knew they were very much hated by the general population for their extreme corruption. Jesus was loved by many of the people and His execution could cause a revolt, and their lives... It ultimately did because they were killed by the Scicarri.

Anyway Jesus knew this would happen: Matt. 21:33–39, 45

Once again it was not  a claim Jewish Laws forbid death sentence. On the contrary, God’s law commands it for blasphemy and leading the nation astray.

Deut 13:6 If your brother, your mother's son, or your son, or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, shall entice you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other elohim, which you have not known, you and your fathers,


Deut 13:10 And you shall stone him with stones, and he shall die, for he has sought to drive you out from YAHWEH your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaves.

Mat 26:65 Then the high priest tore his garments, saying, He blasphemed! Why do we have any more need of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard His blasphemy.

Lev 24:16 And he who blasphemes the name of YAHWEH surely shall die. All the congregation shall certainly cast stones at him. As to the alien, so to a native, when he blasphemes the Name, he shall be executed.

Leviticus clearly states blasphemy should be punished by stoning. But we also know Jesus was crucified. That’s no contradiction because:

Deut 21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and you hang him on a tree:

Deut 21:23  His body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that your land be not defiled, which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance.

That verse can be read, and likely should be read, as first kill the person and afterward hang that person on  tree. Perhaps the interpretation of the ancients was different or it was just a manmade custom that slipped in, they first hung people  alive and then stoned them.

"The passage [in the Temple Scroll] ordains that the death penalty shall be carried out by 'suspending' the convict alive for the charge of treason on the basis of Deuteronomy 21:22-23. What we have here is a pre-Christian halakhic interpretation of Deuteronomy 21:22-23 (crucifixion in the form of a hanging on a tree)" (Paulist Printers 1986, p. 133).

Click, for similar stoning/hanging quotes.

In front of Pilate the Jewish crowd shouted the wanted to stone Him.

Matt 27:25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

“Blood on us” was an euphemism for: link

Lev 20:27 A man also or woman that has a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be on them.

Another quote about stoning.

It was taught:

On the Eve of Passover they hung Yeshu the Notzarine. And the herald went out before him for 40 days [saying]: “Yeshu the Notzarine will go out to be stoned for sorcery and misleading and enticing Israel [to idolatry]. Any who knows [anything] in his defence must come and declare concerning him.” But no-one came to his defence so they hung him on the Eve of Passover.

Possibly the verses below are about the 40 days. But Jesus was so despised by many it just as well could be about the angry people (not court) trying to stone Him.

John 11:7 Then after this He said to the disciples, Let us go to Judea again. 8 The disciples said to Him, Rabbi, just now the Jews were seeking to stone You, and do You go there again?

John 11:53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.
John 11:54 Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews; but went there to a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with his disciples.
John 11:55 And the Jews' passover was near at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves.

John 19:16 Then delivered he him [Jesus] therefore to them [the judges] to be crucified. And they [the judges] took Jesus, and led him away.
John 19:17 And he bearing his cross [yoke, horizontal beam only] went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha:
John 19:18 Where they [the judges] crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the middle.



Part of the punishment for the crimes Jesus and the two other men were accused of, was excommunication from Israel. The excommunication was done according to the following ritual:

a] Shofar blast announced the event.

b] A man with a red flag  stood near the SE  cloisters/near the court. (1)

c] A man on a white horse and holding a wooden plaque on which the charge was written, stood .  (King of Israel)

d] The condemned was led over the red heifer bridge. (2)
e] If the condemned had something that pleaded in his favor he would be led back for an extra hearing.

Even if the convicted one say, “I have something to plead in my own defence,” he is to be brought back, it may be four or five times, provided his plea is reasonable; then if he be acquitted he is set free, and if not, he is again taken out to be stoned.
Danby, Tractate Sanhedrin, p. 87; M. Sanh. VI. I

Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opens not his mouth.

If someone spoke in favor of the convict the person with the red flag signaled the horseman who would bring the convict back to court for an additional hearing. This could be repeated up to 4 or 5 times. Even on the convict's request. Jesus didn't do so.


The carrying the 'cross' to the execution site

Mark 15:21 And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross.

It must here be noted that the “yoke” was not what Christian tradition claims. It was not the Roman “cross” or even the crossbeam of the cross. It was, instead, a sturdy piece of wood fitted over the neck like the yoke of an ox, one that might easily be attached with ropes to another living tree and could be removed after execution.

As to the gibbet [yoke, patibulum], it must not be a natural [as part of a living tree] or permanent one, like a tree, but an artificial arrangement, easily removable [from the tree]; and when once used, must be buried out of sight

Sanh. vi. 4, 46b; Sifre, Deut. 221

Josh 7:15 and it hath been, he who is captured with the devoted thing is burnt with fire, he and all that he hath, because he hath transgressed the covenant of Jehovah, and because he hath done folly in Israel.'

As to the gibbet [yoke, patibulum], it must not be a natural [as part of a living tree] or permanent one, like a tree, but an artificial arrangement, easily removable [from the tree]; and when once used, must be buried out of sight
Sanh. vi. 4, 46b; Sifre, Deut. 221) [Capital Punishment, The Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 557].

But has it not been taught: ‘The stone with which he [the condemned] was stoned, the gallows on which he was hanged, the sword with which he was beheaded, or the cloth with which he was strangled, are all buried with him? [Talmud, Sanhedrin 45b].

Peter 1:39 And while they were relating what they had seen, again they see three males who have come out from they sepulcher, with the two supporting the other one, and a cross following them *

That made me think of Mat 16:24. Especially the last translation seems to fit. Does the verse mean something like 'follow until death'?

24 Then said Jesus to his disciples, `If any one doth will to come after me, let him disown himself, and take up his cross, and follow me,

24 Then Yah Shua says to his disciples, If anyone wills to come after me, he is to utterly deny himself, and take his stake and follow me.

24 Then Yahshua said to His disciples, If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and let him bear his torture stake, and let him follow Me.

When within 10 cubits of the execution site the man had a last chance to confess his sins.

Ten cubits from the stoning place they say to the condemned man, "Confess!" It happened to one who went out to be stoned, that when they told him to confess he said, "May my death be an expiation of all my sins; and if I have done this, let it not be forgiven me, and let the court of Israel be innocent." When this was reported to the judges their eyes trickled with tears, but they said, "It is not possible to reprieve him, for then there would be no end to the matter; but his blood is hung on the neck of his witnesses" [Tosefta, Sanhedrin 9.5]

When within 4 cubits of the execution site the man was stripped naked.

Four cubits from the stoning-place the criminal is stripped [Mishnah, Sanhedrin 6.3].

Women offered a quite heavy narcotic drink so less pain was felt.

Mat 27:34 they gave Him vinegar mingled with gall to drink. And having tasted, He would not drink.

Gal 3:13 But Christ has rescued us from the curse pronounced by the law. When he was hung on the cross, he took upon himself the curse for our wrongdoing. For it is written in the Scriptures, "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

Jesus likely wasn’t nailed very high on that tree because the sponge was on a stick of the rather small hyssop plant (20 inch, 50cm)

John 19:29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar; and they, having filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it on a hyssop-stalk, bore it to his mouth.

"That the execution was a Jewish affair, we have verification in Acts 4:9, where the rulers of Israel are confronted with the execution of Jesus. There is just no getting around the fact that the entire process was a Jewish affair from beginning to end, and it is the only conclusion we can draw from the Talmudic writings, which speak nothing of the Romans"

A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus, p. 71

 "When the trial is finished, the man convicted is brought out to be stoned. The stoning place was outside the court ... When ten cubits from the stoning place they say to him, 'Confess: for it is the custom of all about to be put to death to make confession; and every one who confesses has a share in the world to come.' ... Four cubits from the stoning place the criminal is stripped ... The drop from the stoning place was twice the height of a man. One of the witnesses pushes the criminal from behind, so that he falls face downward. He is then turned over on his back. If he die from this fall, that is sufficient. If not, the second witness takes the stone and drops it on his heart. If this cause death that is sufficient; if not, he is stoned by all the congregation of Israel."

Mishnah, Sanhedrin 6:1-4

He was  nailed to the horizontal piece of wood ( he carried) and lifted up the tree.

John 3:14 And even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,

The apocalyptical Gospel of Peter clearly mentions they only removed nails from His hands when taking Him of the cross. Feet wasn't in the original manuscript of the NT. Roman style was with one nail through both ankles. The Jewish style was hanging from the tree. A nail in the feet or not, it was a real gruesome experience. Then ropes were attached to the yoke and He was lifted up the tree.


Horrors at the execution site

Living tree

Mark 15:30 Save yourself, and come down from the cross.


Stauros - G4716

Thayer Definition:

1) an upright stake, especially a pointed one

2) a cross

2a) a well known instrument of most cruel and ignominious punishment,…

2b) the crucifixion which Christ underwent

Xulon - G3586

Thayer Definition:

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers hath raised up Jesus—whom ye got into your hands, suspending him upon a tree .

Acts 10:39 We also are witnesses of all things which he did, both in the country of the Jews and Jerusalem; Whom they even slew by suspending

upon a tree.

Acts 13:29 And when they had finished all those things which concerning him had been written, taking him down from the tree, they put him in a tomb.

Gal. 3:13 Messiah hath redeemed us out of the curse of the law [instruction], having become in our behalf a curse; because it is written—Cursed is everyone that hangeth upon a tree.

1 Pet. 2:24 Who our sins himself bare up in his body unto the tree.

Luke 23:31 For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?

Rev 2:7 He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit said to the churches; To him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the middle of the paradise of God.

Stauros, which is always translated as cross is closely linked to Xulon wich is translated as tree. Rev 2:7 is a big hint. The “tree of life in paradise” is clearly a reference to the tree of life in the garden of eden (Gen 2:9). Was that a cross or a living tree….?

Gen 2:9  And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the middle of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Staring bones

Luke 24:39 See My hands and My feet, that I am He? Feel Me and see, because a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see Me having.

Jesus was showing His bones.

Psalm 22

16 and You appoint Me to the dust of death; for dogs have encircled Me; a band of spoilers have hemmed Me in, piercing My hands and My feet.

17 I count all My bones; they look, they stare at Me.

18 They divide My garments among them, and they made fall a lot for My clothing.

While the above verses clearly are about crucifixion/hung on a tree, they also support and even prove stoning.

His bones bones were visible because His flesh was ripped away by the endless barrage of small sharp flint stones which still can be found in large quantities on Mt. Olives.

Crucifixion doesn't have that effect. Stoning most certainly ripped flesh of the bones. Scourging was done on the back of the body. The front of the body was protected the upright post the victim was tied too. So it's unlikely the corrective beating at Pilate's court did that. In fact Scripture itself testifies to that fact.

Isa 50:6 I gave My back to strikers, and My cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; I did not hide My face from shame and spitting.

Breaking of The Bread

The (Passover) lamb was then hung upon special hooks or sticks and skinned

The Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 556.

Jesus was hung on a stick too. He was skinned by the sharp stones ripping of His skin and laying bare His bones.

Skinning can be compared to breaking of pieces of flesh. During Last Supper Jesus broke small pieces of the bread and gave a little piece to everyone at the table.

Mat 26:26 And as they ate, taking the bread and blessing it, Yahshua broke and gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body.

It can't mean His bones were broken because John 19:36 refutes that. Nails don’t break a body either.

John 19:36 For these things happened that the Scripture might be fulfilled, "Not a bone of Him shall be broken."

The barrage of stones lasting for hours continually chipped away little pieces of skin/flesh/'bread'. The Bread Of Life was broken to pieces on the cross.

John 6:48 I am the Bread of life.

Job 30:12 On my right hand, the young brood rose up,––My feet, they thrust aside, and cast up against me their earthworks of destruction;

Stones of the road. Even today many sharp flint stones can be found on mount Olives.


Psalm 22:16 and You appoint Me to the dust of death; for dogs have encircled Me; a band of spoilers have hemmed Me in, piercing My hands and My feet.

Psalm 22:17 I count all My bones; they look, they stare at Me.

Psalm 22:18 They divide My garments among them, and they made fall a lot for My clothing.

The Hebrew word for pierced in translated from varies between manuscripts.

KJV uses 'karah' for its translation. Meaning: to dig, dig trough, to be dug

A note in the margin of the KJV shows 'aryeh'. Meaning: lion, pictures or images of lions.

Aryeh (lion) is rooted in the word arah: to pluck, gather.

A commentator wrote this:

The Masoretic text takes the word for pierced in (Psalm 22:16) a clear crucifixion Psalm kaaru and changes the last letter from a vav to a yud. The change of letter changes the meaning from pierced my hands, and feet, to lion, as in "as a lion they are at my hands and feet". The Septuagint has pierced from the original Hebrew kaaru not kaari. According to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Hebrew Word in verse 16 is kaaru "pierced" and not lion. Not only that but the Aramaic Peshitta also agrees with the Septuagint.

No matter which word is the correct one it seems to me none of them really prove it should be translated as pierced. I think both word meanings leave lots of room for interpreting it as flesh torn away by the impact of the many stones.

In Zech 12:10 the word pierced is translated from daqar: to pierce, thrust through, pierce through. That would have been a much better word for the wounds inflicted by a nail.

Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Deut 23:1 He being wounded, crushed, or cut in his male member shall not enter into the assembly of YAHWEH.

Wounded = chalal = (fatal) wound, pierce, bore, slain. -> The nails driven trough His hands.

Stripes = chabburah = bruise, stripe, wound, blow -> The scourging He received at Pilate's place.

Bruised = daka = be crushed, be contrite, be broken. -> Stoning


Isa uses  the word 'daka', Deut the words 'daka' and 'pasa'. Both words have  a similar meaning.

pasa: A verb meaning to bruise, to crush. It means to destroy or ruin something by violently inflicting blows on it. It describes the emasculating of a man's testicles by crushing (Deu 23:1 [2]). It has the sense of injuring or bruising someone (1Ki 20:37; Son 5:7).

daka: A feminine noun indicating a crushing of the testicles, emasculated (by crushing). It denotes the crushing of the testicles (Deu 23:1 [2]); KJV, wounded in the stones).

Psalm 22:16 and You appoint Me to the dust of death; for dogs have encircled Me; a band of spoilers have hemmed Me in, piercing My hands and My feet.

Looks like pierced His feet can have a totally different meaning.

Feet = regel: A feminine noun meaning a foot. It is the common word for a literal foot, human or animal. It is used figuratively, but has acquired many other uses. ... The phrase 'me raglehem' refers to urine, water of their privates (2Ki 18:27). Foot is a euphemism for male genitals. 1  2  3  4

Matt 19:11 But He said to them, Not every man can apply this Word to himself, but only he to whom it is given.

Matt 19:12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who made eunuchs of themselves for the sake of the kingdom of Heaven. He who is able to understand, let him understand it.

Casting lots

Matt 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and on my clothing did they cast lots.

Casting lots for the clothing of a convicted person before he was dead was strictly forbidden by Roman law, but the Jewish law was the opposite. That even more shows it was Jewish affair.

Roman law
Clothing of which a man can be stripped are those things which he brought with him when he was placed in prison, and with which he is attired when he is conducted to punishment, as the name itself indicates. Hence, neither the executioners nor their assistants can claim these things as spoils at the moment when the culprit is executed.

Jewish law
Our Rabbis taught: The property of those executed by the State [note 3: The reference is to the Jewish State; e.g. those executed for treason against the King (YHWH)] belongs to the King (YHWH, or his representatives); the property of those executed by the Beth din belongs to their heirs . . . hence it is said, Naboth did curse God and the King [note 1: pointing to his culpability for treason to the king [government] in addition to blasphemy, which is punished by the Beth din; hence his estate would fall to the crown [government)].
b. Sanh. 48b; 48b n. 1,3


Isa 52:14 Just as many were astonished over You, so much was the disfigurement from man, His appearance and His form from sons of mankind.

Scourging gives some disfigurement but stoning much more. And it was very extreme according to the verse. Mary didn't recognize Jesus until she heard His voice. The men on the road to Emmaus didn't recognize Him either. Thomas didn't even recognize Him after he was told it was Jesus.

Rev 13:8 ... Book of Life of the Lamb having been slain from the foundation of the world.

Slain = sphazo = slay, slaughter, butcher, mortally wounded

Deut 13:9 But you shall surely slay him; your hand shall be first upon him to cause him to die, and the hand of all the people last.

That’s group effort. Stoning is, Roman style crucifixion isn’t.

Since, with reference to the enticer to idolatry, the Bible (Deut. 13:10 [A. V. 9]) employs the term Harag = "to slay" ("Thou shalt surely slay him"), and this is immediately explained by the addition (ib. 11 [A. V. 10]), "Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die," it follows that the term "harag" used in reference to the beast likewise means to slay by stoning. And as for the criminal himself, his sentence is the same as that of the beast in connection with which he is mentioned (Sifra, l.c. x.; Sanh. 54b).

Jesus was charged for enticing the nation.

Between two thieves

Matt 27:38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

The two thieves on the cross, were no thieves but political/religious activists (Zealots) who stirred up the people against the Temple leaders. Their aim was putting a legitimate High Priest in charge: a descendant of Aaron; not a Saducian/Alexandrian  high priest from Edomite descent, put in place by the Romans. For a long time the illegitimate Alexandrian Temple priests were in charge. The Sanhedrin was allowed to execute only one type of judgment on the same day. Meaning the 'thieves' were charged with the same sort of crimes as Jesus was.

Shall we say, because two [men] may not be tried [and] sentenced on the same day? But R. Hisda said: This was taught only with reference to [charges involving] two different modes of execution; whereas [cases that involve only] one mode of execution may be tried? But it was so, that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.

  [Talmud, Sanhedrin 35a]

John 19:31 …. the Jews made a request to Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

John 19:32 The soldiers therefore came,….

‘Came’ means they weren’t there yet. Another bit of proof it was a Jewish affair.

John 19:32 ….and indeed broke the legs of the first, and of the other man who was crucified with him.

John 19:33 But having come to Jesus, when they saw him now having died, they did not break his legs.

Hidden in that verse is that the 3 people were not on separate trees or crosses.
A soldier approached and broke the legs of the first thief. The soldier kept walking and broke the legs of the other thief. The soldier kept walking and now came to Jesus. How can that be if Jesus was on the cross in the middle? He would have been the second person the soldier reached.

The solution is simple. All three were hung on the same thick tree. Jesus was facing the Temple, a thief on each side of the tree. The back of the tree was empty.

The soldier walked in a circle around the tree. From the first thief he walked around the empty back of the tree to the second thief. From there he walked to the front of the tree where Jesus was.


The scars of Paul

Gal 6:17 From henceforth, let no one trouble me, for I bear in my body the marks of the Master Yahshua.

Paul compares his own marks (scars), infirmity (pain) and damaged eyes with the last hours of Jesus. Paul wasn't crucified so his scars couldn't have been a reference to holes left by nails. Neither was Paul scourged. But was stoned. By comparing himself with Jesus he confirms the stoning of Jesus.

Acts 14:19 But Jews came there from Antioch and Iconium, and persuading the crowds, and stoning Paul, they dragged him outside the city, supposing him to have died.

Gal 4:13 but ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you the first time:

Pauls states his flesh is weak, painful the first time he visited four years ago.

Gal 4:14 and that which was a temptation to you in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but ye received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.

Paul wasn't laughed at and rejected because he looked so ugly because of his many scars. Keep in mind Paul was only stoned for a short while, four years ago and still looked very bad.

Gal 4:15 Where then is that gratulation of yourselves? for I bear you witness, that, if possible, ye would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me.

The Galatians loved Paul so much they symbolically would have given him their own eyes because Paul's were damaged by the stoning. No need to 'give eyes' to a man with good sight. Paul wasn't complaining about bad sight due to age but clearly connected it to his scars. In fact the head, and with that the eyes, were the prime target during stoning..

Mark 12:4 And again He sent to them another slave; stoning that one, they struck him in the head and sent him away, insulting him.

The following verse is possibly connected to his very bad eyesight due to being stoned in the past.

Gal 6:11 See in what large letters I write to you with my hand.

Gal 6:17 From now on let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.

Marks is translated from the Greek word “stigma” (G4742) - puncture marks. Paul was full of scar tissue of from stoning. The “marks of the Lord” weren't crucifixion marks because Paul was stoned not crucified.

Jesus was blinded too.

Psalm 38:10 My heart throbs; my power forsakes me! And the light of my eyes, they also are not with me.

Psalm 69:3 I am weary from my crying, my throat is scorched; my eyes fail while I wait for my Elohim.

Jesus was stoned for a much longer period (6 hours) than Paul. Likely by larger group of people.

Try to imagine what Jesus looked like the next days. Even His close friends didn't recognize Him. John 20:14-15, 19-25; John 21:4, 12; Mark 16:12;

Isa 52:14 Just as many were astonished over You, so much was the disfigurement from man, His appearance and His form from sons of mankind.

He completely disfigured. That wasn't from the mild flogging He got at Pilate's place. Neither it was from the nails at the cross.


Blood loss of the Red Heifer

Pilate was amazed about the very early death of Jesus because he didn't expect Him to die so soon. What caused that early death? It wasn't due to blood loss from the nails through because history records cases of up to 9 days at the cross. Likely the average was much shorter but I think it’s fair to assume that nobody survives for 9 days if crucifixion causes major blood loss. The beating at Pilate’s place was less severe than what most criminals got before they got crucified. Pilate likely didn’t know much about Jewish laws and when he said “do it according to your Law”, he likely didn’t have an idea what that law exactly was. However being a Roman he likely knew a lot about the life expectancy when things were done the Roman way.

"An iron spike was driven through the middle part of each wrist between the carpal bones. The loss of blood was moderate since the spike did not penetrate a major artery"

Erich H. Kiehl, The Passion of Our Lord, Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2003, p. 128.

The NT keeps mentioning the blood Jesus shed for us. The OT mentions many sacrifices involving blood. All of them of course are patterns pointing to Jesus. Jesus fulfilled every prophesy written about Him. Unfortunately those prophesies and closely connected God inspired Laws included a gruesome death at the cross. If Jesus just ‘missed’ prophesy He wouldn’t have been the Messiah. So if the OT speaks about stoning He had to be stoned. “Romans were in charge.” Is no valid excuse because prophesies take everything into account. It’s God’s statement of facts. Not a possibility if  mankind doesn’t interfere.

So  there must have been severe blood loss. Shed isn't the few drops caused by the nails of crucifixion. The beating at Pilate's caused blood loss too, but that's irrelevant because the whole prophetic meaning of blood loss was linked to the red heifer which was killed outside the camp.

Num 19:2-3

2 This is the statute of the law which YAHWEH has commanded, saying, Speak to the sons of Israel, that they bring you a red heifer, without blemish, in which there is no blemish, on which no yoke ever came.

3 And you shall give her to Eleazar the priest, and she shall be brought forth outside the camp; and she shall be slaughtered before his face.

A causeway was made from the temple mount to the Mount of Olives, being constructed of arches above arches, each arch placed directly above each pier as a protection against a grave in the depths, whereby the priest who was to burn the cow, the cow itself and all who aided in its preparation went forth to the Mount of Olives.

Mishnah Parah 3:6


The blood must be shed:
- when alive so the spear after death doesn’t qualify.
- near the altar of the red heifer. So any blood loss at Pilate’s doesn’t qualify.

 That only leaves the 6 hours He was alive on the cross.

The red heifer sacrifice was not for removal of sin; it was to purify those who have been in contact with the dead. For example when burying a person. The red heifer was the only female animal that was sacrificed. Women stand for birth. I don’t know the deeper implications of that buy I have a strong feeling it’s about our resurrection itself.


More things that link Jesus to the red heifer


The red heifer was sacrificed - So was Jesus.

The red heifer died outside the camp - So did Jesus.

The red heifer willingly walked to it’s execution spot - So did Jesus.

The red heifer’s blood was sprinkled - Jesus shed His blood.

The red heifer was completely red - Jesus was totally covered in blood.
The red heifer purified people - Jesus purifies us also.
The red heifer is three years old - Jesus was in His third year of ministry.

Gen 15:9 And he said to him, Take a heifer three years old for me, and a she-goat three years old, and a ram three years old, and a turtle dove, and a young pigeon.

Numbers 19 is about the two step purifying process of the red heifer. In the natural realm/literally it had to be done on the 3rd and 7th literal 24-hour day. Prophetically we are told a 24-hour day is as a 1000 years for God. Views differ on the exact dates of birth and death of Jesus but we are nearing the end of 2 days (2000 years) ago. The creation date of Adam, isn't exactly know today we live near the end of the the 6th day (6000 year). When the 2nd day ends the 3rd day starts. Likewise when the 6th day ends the 7th day starts. So 'soon' we are living in the 7th day from the Adam (the 1st Adam) and 7 days from Jesus (the 2nd Adam). So prophetically the 3rd and 7 day are the same day.

Num 19:11 He who touches the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days.

Num 19:12 The same shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean, but if he does not purify himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean.

2Pet 3:8 But beloved, this one thing you should not ignore, that one day with Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Please note this isn’t pinpointing an exact date of His return because while the 3rd and 7th days are the same day, nothing is said about the same hour. All we know is that both purifications happen somewhere in the next day (1000 year)

According to Jewish history only nine red heifers are born. They list the people who sacrificed the red heifers. They believe the tenth red heifer will be killed by the Messiah. I don’t know were that knowledge came from but it was/is correct. Obviously they don’t believe Jesus was the Messiah and are still waiting. We know the Messiah arrived 2000 years ago and died as the  tenth and final Red Heifer.
You may wonder how only 9 red heifers can purify people that lived from the time of Moses who killed the first red heifer (at least) 70AD when the Temple was destroyed. The red heifer was burned to ashes and those ashes were kept. When somebody needed purification after touching a dead person a large jar was filled with water and a tiny bit of ashes was mixed with the water. While those jars were just jars they obviously had great significance in the Temple rituals. The Jews had laws for about everything and one of them was that those jars never may contain anything else than water and/or ashes.

John 2

1 And on the third day a marriage took place in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Yahshua was there.

2 And Yahshua and His disciples also were invited to the marriage.

3 And being short of wine, the mother of Yahshua said to Him, They have no wine.

4 Yahshua said to her, What do you want from Me to you, woman? My hour has not yet come.

5 His mother said to the servants, Whatever He says to you, do.

6 And there were six stone waterpots standing, according to the purification of the Jews, each containing two or three measures.

7 Yahshua said to them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them to the top.

8 And He said to them, Now draw out and take it to the master of the feast. And they took it.

9 But when the master of the feast tasted the water that had become wine, and did not know from where it was (but the servants drawing the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom,

10 and he said to him, Every man first sets on the good wine, and when they have drunk freely, then the inferior one. You have kept the good wine until now.

Of course there are many 3rd days but everything Jesus did had prophetic significance. Likewise I don’t believe it was a coincidence that the jars were purification jars. The water was turned into wine which according to Jewish law rendered the jars unfit for purification purposes. I think that’s symbolic for the fact that Jesus is our purification. Similar to the fact that after Jesus’ death no more animal sacrifices were needed.

Wine (blood of the grapes) obviously points to His blood.
All sorts of animal sacrifices were needed to cover sins, purify etc. Jesus put an end to those needs because He was symbolically the perfect animal that didn’t just temporarily cover sins but permanently erased them. For example many lambs were killed but the Jesus the perfect Lamb ended the need for more lamb sacrifices. Likewise Red Heifer-Jesus removed the need for animal-red heifers.
So I believe that Jesus making the purification jars unfit for further use was a  first sign the Red Heifer arrived. I don’t know the exact links but I’m sure the wedding of Cana and His first recorded miracle is connected to His own wedding that will take place the next ‘day’.

Adam was created on the 6th day, there were 6 jars.

Numbers 19

4 And Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood with his finger, and shall sprinkle of her blood toward the front of the tent of meeting seven times.

5 And the heifer shall be burned before his eyes; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood with her dung, shall be burned.

6 And the priest shall take cedar wood, and hyssop and scarlet, and shall cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer.

Acts 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which He did, both in the country of the Jews, and in Jerusalem. They did away with Him, hanging Him on a tree.

John 19:29 Then a vessel full of vinegar was set, and having filled a sponge with vinegar, and putting hyssop around, they brought it to His mouth.

Matt 27:28 And stripping Him, they put a scarlet cloak around Him.

I have yet to find where His blood was sprinkled toward the Temple, but possibly this is symbolic for the sprinkling itself:
1] Sweating blood in the garden
2] Beaten
3] Beard plucked
4] Crown of thorns
5] Nails in His hands
6] Nails in His feet
7] Spear in His side

But there are problems with that. The spear is after death. Several others are not outside the camp. Etc It could be the bullock of Lev 16:14

Quotes not used elsewhere in this article that are still worth reading.


Jesus of Nazareth’s Trial in Sanhedrin 43a

A Book of Evidence - The Jewish Trial

Apocryptical Gospel of Peter